Headlines

Telegraph

Report: Sex-selective abortions of girls occurring in UK too

The Government was on Thursday night urged to open an inquiry after officials found signs that birth rates for girls and boys vary noticeably according to where their mothers were born.

A health minister said that these differences in rates of male and female births among mothers of certain nationalities may “fall outside the range considered possible without intervention”.

It forms the first official statistical evidence potentially backing up concerns that sex-selection abortions are being carried out in Britain. …

After this newspaper received information that the procedures were becoming increasingly common for cultural and social reasons, undercover reporters filmed doctors offering women terminations based on gender.

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

They should publish the actual data per country of origin of mother, right?

PattyJ on January 11, 2013 at 12:10 AM

How lovely. What charming people.

John the Libertarian on January 11, 2013 at 12:15 AM

It’s coming here. Abortion on demand is why Obama won re-election. Just ask the 26% of the voting public in the last election, who just happened to be young, single women.

I am beginning to wonder if we should let these sick libs kill themselves off.

goflyers on January 11, 2013 at 12:25 AM

So empowering women means killing girls.

HidetheDecline on January 11, 2013 at 1:06 AM

He rejected Lord Alton’s request for data to be collected on the sex of unborn babies at the time of abortion. The minister said recording the gender of foetuses “raises ethical and clinical issues”.

A Department of Health spokesman said any abortion based on sex selection is “illegal and morally wrong”.

Welcome to the world of moral relativism, where killing babies is perfectly fine and just a matter of personal choice — unless, of course, the choice is based on the sex of the baby, in which case it’s both illegal and morally wrong.

Killing babies: goood.
Recording the gender of babies killed: baaad.

There Goes The Neighborhood on January 11, 2013 at 1:07 AM

Obamacare mandates coverage for prenatal screenings, so, yeah, it’s going to happen a lot more here, too.

theperfecteconomist on January 11, 2013 at 1:08 AM

There Goes The Neighborhood on January 11, 2013 at 1:07 AM

Exactly. In our country, we don’t kill babies because we want a son. We kill babies because we want a career.

Tzetzes on January 11, 2013 at 1:14 AM

Utterly sickening, but not surprising. The moral depravity of man, of man’s inhumanity to man, of man’s selfishness and pride.

And we’re nearing the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. We will and are seeing a decline in physical/surgical abortions but a rise in chemical/pharmaceutical abortions through the usage of “emergency contraception” such as the “morning after pills” and of course ru-486.

Ezk. 16:5,6, God talking to/of Israel,

“”No eye looked with pity on you to do any of these things for you, to have compassion on you. Rather you were thrown out into the open field, for you were abhorred on the day you were born. When I passed by you and saw you squirming in your blood, I said to you while you were in your blood, ‘Live!’ Yes, I said to you while you were in your blood, ‘Live!’”

and then Ezk. 16:21,22, 23

“You slaughtered My children and offered them up to idols by causing them to pass through the fire. Besides all your abominations and harlotries you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare and squirming in your blood. Then it came about after all your wickedness (‘Woe, woe to you!’ declares the Lord GOD),”

Logus on January 11, 2013 at 1:25 AM

It’s happening here as well.

INC on January 11, 2013 at 1:55 AM

Congratulations feminists, you’ve the won the right to reduce the female population. You go girl.

Baerwulf on January 11, 2013 at 2:15 AM

Logus on January 11, 2013 at 1:25 AM

Israel’s lawgiver wasn’t opposed to sex-selection in his killing, as in this practically Koranic command in Numbers 31.15-18:

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Or (Moses again speaking) Deuteronomy 2.32-35:

Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to fight at Jahaz. And the LORD our God delivered him before us; and we smote him, and his sons, and all his people. And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain: Only the cattle we took for a prey unto ourselves, and the spoil of the cities which we took.

His successor continued in the same vein, as in Joshua 6.20-21:

So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

and Joshua 10.29-42:

And that day Joshua took Makkedah, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof he utterly destroyed, them, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain: and he did to the king of Makkedah as he did unto the king of Jericho. Then Joshua passed from Makkedah, and all Israel with him, unto Libnah, and fought against Libnah. And the LORD delivered it also, and the king thereof, into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein; he let none remain in it; but did unto the king thereof as he did unto the king of Jericho. And Joshua passed from Libnah, and all Israel with him, unto Lachish, and encamped against it, and fought against it. And the LORD delivered Lachish into the hand of Israel, which took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein, according to all that he had done to Libnah. Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he had left him none remaining. And from Lachish Joshua passed unto Eglon, and all Israel with him; and they encamped against it, and fought against it. And they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and all the souls that were therein he utterly destroyed that day, according to all that he had done to Lachish. And Joshua went up from Eglon, and all Israel with him, unto Hebron; and they fought against it. And they took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof, and all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining, according to all that he had done to Eglon; but destroyed it utterly, and all the souls that were therein. And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, to Debir; and fought against it. And he took it, and the king thereof, and all the cities thereof; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed all the souls that were therein; he left none remaining: as he had done to Hebron, so he did to Debir, and to the king thereof; as he had done also to Libnah, and to her king. So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. And Joshua smote them from Kadeshbarnea even unto Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon. And all these kings and their land did Joshua take at one time, because the LORD God of Israel fought for Israel.

It’s certainly possible to follow Jehovah and be in favor of (divinely sanctioned) infanticide, and also quite possible to deny all gods (as I do) and be opposed to it.

Tzetzes on January 11, 2013 at 2:39 AM

You would think that people who move from somewhere like Pakistan, India, or China would be able to appease their home country’s culture with regard to marriage and bride-price without making too serious a dent in the wallet. However, it seems the monetary demands are proportional to the bride’s family’s income. The DFW area has a large Indian and Pakistani community, and you should see the bridal stuff, rental halls, and the like all in place for weddings! They can drop some pretty heavy cash on little Seema’s wedding.

Even an arranged marriage to someone from the home country is not immune to the financial demands. You can bet the groom’s family in Hyderabad knows exactly what the parents are making, and will be insulted if the bride’s family doesn’t spend in proportion to it. So the economic motive not to birth girls travels with the immigrant family to the First World. This is an explanation, not an excuse.

Sekhmet on January 11, 2013 at 2:42 AM

Tzetzes on January 11, 2013 at 2:39 AM

You’re missing the point of the passage. God was recalling to the Israelites how he had saved them as if they were a discarded newborn and they go and follow pagan practices including infant sacrifice. He charges the Jewish people with effectively spitting in His face, disrespecting the gift of life He gave them as His Chosen People.

God was also commanding the Israelites to obliterate certain peoples as a punishment for their sins, just as eventually he punished His own Chosen People for their own transgressions against Him. The difference being that He had a covenant with the Israelites that He would always remember them and save them.

Many look at the Old Testament and all of the violence and killing, specifically of innocent young children and babies at the direction of God and they cry foul, but they do so already from the perspective of a non-Jew or non-Christian. To be sure, the knowledge that God commanded the death of innocent children is troubling, but this discounts and misunderstands a lot of serious theological foundations and underpinnings as to the nature of God and His Will.

Too many pay too much attention to the bark of a couple of trees and miss the whole forest for the chips on their shoulders and rose colored glasses over their eyes.

I’m going to go out on a limb and make an assumption that you’ve already heard and read arguments concerning justification for the violence in the Old Testament at the command of God, but just in case, here’s a link to read.

Do I think it’ll change your mind? Probably not, but the onus is on you, not me. I can only hope and pray that eventually something will click in your heart and soul.

On a tangential note, here’s a serious exercise for you. Imagine you’re God. Knowing everything that’d happen, specifically in relation to the Old Testament, what would you do differently? Take into account that every new action would necessarily create a different outcome from what the Bible states has happened.

Logus on January 11, 2013 at 3:43 AM

Tzetzes on January 11, 2013 at 2:39 AM

Another source. W.C.Lane. His Kalam argument might be flawed and it’s apparent that the prior source pulls from Lane, but his overall essay is longer and more indepth.

Last I’ll say on it.

Logus on January 11, 2013 at 3:53 AM

Baerwulf on January 11, 2013 at 2:15 AM

+1

cmsinaz on January 11, 2013 at 6:58 AM

So empowering women means killing girls.

HidetheDecline on January 11, 2013 at 1:06 AM

Feminist Darwinism: Survival of the fittest.

thebrokenrattle on January 11, 2013 at 7:21 AM

Wait, are you saying that gender-specific abortions are occurring in a country whose top male baby name is some variation of Mohammed? You’ve got to be kidding me, right?

Best line from The Dictator (upon find out his wife is pregnant): Are you having a boy or an abortion?

Second best line (after helping a pregnant woman deliver her baby): I’ve got bad news. It’s a girl. Where’s the trash can?

Odysseus on January 11, 2013 at 7:24 AM

Tzetzes on January 11, 2013 at 2:39 AM

Its also possible to follow the word of our Lord and understand from the Book of Luke, God revealed John the Baptist acknowledged the presence of Jesus in the womb. While John was still in the womb.

And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

The is no mistaking the word of God. Even in the womb, they are a souled man or woman.

smoothsailing on January 11, 2013 at 7:35 AM

You know if you want more boy babies – you kind of need girl babies too.

Just saying.

gophergirl on January 11, 2013 at 8:07 AM

Wait, are you saying that gender-specific abortions are occurring in a country whose top male baby name is some variation of Mohammed? You’ve got to be kidding me, right?

Odysseus on January 11, 2013 at 7:24 AM

Stole my post. People need to remember what’s going on in the UK.

MelonCollie on January 11, 2013 at 8:26 AM

Wait until they discover the “gay” gene. Then what?

rhombus on January 11, 2013 at 8:36 AM

For nearly 50 years, we’ve been told that we can’t restrict a “women’s right to choose” to the choices other people find morally acceptable. Well, guess what? Either a “woman’s right to choose” is sacrosanct…or it isn’t. Welcome to the Land of Consequences — where abortion now includes the systematic disappearance of the female sex.

This would be funny if it weren’t so tragic.

CJ on January 11, 2013 at 9:15 AM

This is what you get with the EU ! Open boarders bring
all kinds of different cultural crap . Lets see now , who
likes to kill little girls ?

Lucano on January 11, 2013 at 9:58 AM